Harvard Professor Exposes Google and Facebook

Video Source: vpro documentary 
By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com


  • In her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” social psychologist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff reveals how the biggest tech companies in the world have hijacked our personal data — so-called “behavioral surplus data streams” — without our knowledge or consent and are using it against you to generate profits for themselves
  • Companies like Facebook, Google and third parties of all kinds have the power — and are using that power — to target your personal inner demons, to trigger you, and to take advantage of you when you’re at your most vulnerable to entice you into action that serves them, commercially or politically
  • Your entire existence — even your shifting moods, deciphered by facial recognition software — has become a source of revenue for corporate entities as you’re being cleverly maneuvered into doing (and typically buying) or thinking something you may not have done, bought or thought otherwise
  • Facebook’s massive experiments, in which they used subliminal cues to see if they could make people happier or sadder and affect real-world behavior offline, proved that — by manipulating language and inserting subliminal cues in the online context — they can change real-world behavior and real-world emotion, and that these methods and powers can be exercised “while bypassing user awareness”
  • The Google Nest security system has a hidden microphone built into it that isn’t featured in any of the schematics for the device. Voice data, and all the information delivered through your daily conversations, is tremendously valuable to Big Data, and add to their ever-expanding predictive modeling capabilities

“In a room where people unanimously maintain a conspiracy of silence, one word of truth sounds like a pistol shot.” ~ Czesław Miłosz1

In recent years, a number of brave individuals have alerted us to the fact that we’re all being monitored and manipulated by big data gatherers such as Google and Facebook, and shed light on the depth and breadth of this ongoing surveillance. Among them is a social psychologist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff.

Her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” is one of the best books I have read in the last few years. It’s an absolute must-read if you have any interest in this topic and want to understand how Google and Facebook have obtained such massive control of your life.

Her book reveals how the biggest tech companies in the world have hijacked our personal data — so-called “behavioral surplus data streams” — without our knowledge or consent and are using it against us to generate profits for themselves. WE have become the product. We are the real revenue stream in this digital economy.

“The term ‘surveillance capitalism’ is not an arbitrary term,” Zuboff says in the featured VPRO Backlight documentary. “Why ‘surveillance’? Because it must be operations that are engineered as undetectable, indecipherable, cloaked in rhetoric that aims to misdirect, obfuscate and downright bamboozle all of us, all the time.”

The Birth of Surveillance Capitalism

In the featured video, Zuboff “reveals a merciless form of capitalism in which no natural resources, but the city itself, serves are the raw material.”2 She also explains how this surveillance capitalism came about in the first place.

As most revolutionary inventions, chance played a role. After the 2000 dot.com crisis that burst the internet bubble, a startup company named Google struggled to survive. Founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin appeared to be looking at the beginning of the end for their company.

By chance, they discovered that “residual data” left behind by users during their internet searchers had tremendous value. They could trade this data; they could sell it. By compiling this residual data, they could predict the behavior of any given internet user and thus guarantee advertisers a more targeted audience. And so, surveillance capitalism was born.

The Data Collection You Know About Is the Least Valuable

Comments such as “I have nothing to hide, so I don’t care if they track me,” or “I like targeted ads because they make my shopping easier” reveal our ignorance about what’s really going on. We believe we understand what kind of information is being collected about us. For example, you might not care that Google knows you bought a particular kind of shoe or a particular book.

However, the information we freely hand over is the least important of the personal information actually being gathered about us, Zuboff notes. Tech companies tell us the data collected is being used to improve services, and indeed, some of it is.

But it is also being used to model human behavior by analyzing the patterns of behavior of hundreds of millions of people. Once you have a large enough training model, you can begin to accurately predict how different types of individuals will behave over time.

The data gathered is also being used to predict a whole host of individual attributes about you, such as personality quirks, sexual orientation, political orientation — “a whole range of things we never ever intended to disclose,” Zuboff says.

How Is Predictive Data Being Used?

All sorts of predictive data are handed over with each photo you upload to social media. For example, it’s not just that tech companies can see your photos. Your face is being used without your knowledge or consent to train facial recognition software, and none of us is told how that software is intended to be used.

As just one example, the Chinese government is using facial recognition software to track and monitor minority groups and advocates for democracy, and that could happen elsewhere as well, at any time.

So that photo you uploaded of yourself at a party provides a range of valuable information — from the types of people you’re most likely to spend your time with and where you’re likely to go to have a good time, to information about how the muscles in your face move and alter the shape of your features when you’re in a good mood.

By gathering a staggering amount of data points on each person, minute by minute, Big Data can make very accurate predictions about human behavior, and these predictions are then “sold to business customers who want to maximize our value to their business,” Zuboff says.

Your entire existence — even your shifting moods, deciphered by facial recognition software — has become a source of revenue for many tech corporations. You might think you have free will but, in reality, you’re being cleverly maneuvered and funneled into doing (and typically buying) or thinking something you may not have done, bought, or thought otherwise. And, “our ignorance is their bliss,” Zuboff says.

The Facebook Contagion Experiments

In the documentary, Zuboff highlights Facebook’s massive “contagion experiments, “3,4 in which they used subliminal cues and language manipulation to see if they could make people feel happier or sadder and affect real-world behavior offline. As it turns out, they can. Two key findings from those experiments were:

  1. By manipulating language and inserting subliminal cues in the online context, they can change real-world behavior and real-world emotion
  2. These methods and powers can be exercised “while bypassing user awareness”

In the video, Zuboff also explains how the Pokemon Go online game — which was actually created by Google — was engineered to manipulate real-world behavior and activity for profit. She also describes the scheme in her New York Times article, saying:

“Game players did not know that they were pawns in the real game of behavior modification for profit, as the rewards and punishments of hunting imaginary creatures were used to herd people to the McDonald’s, Starbucks and local pizza joints that were paying the company for ‘footfall,’ in exactly the same way that online advertisers pay for ‘click through’ to their websites.”

You’re Being Manipulated Every Single Day in Countless Ways

Zuboff also reviews what we learned from the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Cambridge Analytica is a political marketing business that, in 2018, used the Facebook data of 80 million Americans to determine the best strategies for manipulating American voters.

Christopher Wylie, now-former director of research at Cambridge Analytica, blew the whistle on the company’s methods. According to Wylie, they had so much data on people, they knew exactly how to trigger fear, rage, and paranoia in any given individual. And, by triggering those emotions, they could manipulate them into looking at a certain website, joining a certain group, and voting for a certain candidate.

So, the reality now is, companies like Facebook, Google and third parties of all kinds, have the power — and are using that power — to target your personal inner demons, to trigger you, and to take advantage of you when you’re at your weakest or most vulnerable to entice you into action that serves them, commercially or politically. It’s certainly something to keep in mind while you surf the web and social media sites.

“It was only a minute ago that we didn’t have many of these tools, and we were fine,” Zuboff says in the film. “We lived rich and full lives. We had close connections with friends and family.

Having said that, I want to recognize that there’s a lot that the digital world brings to our lives, and we deserve to have all of that. But we deserve to have it without paying the price of surveillance capitalism.

Right now, we are in that classic Faustian bargain; 21st century citizens should not have to make the choice of either going analog or living in a world where our self-determination and our privacy are destroyed for the sake of this market logic. That is unacceptable.

Let’s also not be naïve. You get the wrong people involved in our government, at any moment, and they look over their shoulders at the rich control possibilities offered by these new systems.

There will come a time when, even in the West, even in our democratic societies, our government will be tempted to annex these capabilities and use them over us and against us. Let’s not be naïve about that.

When we decide to resist surveillance capitalism — right now when it is in the market dynamic — we are also preserving our democratic future, and the kinds of checks and balances that we will need going forward in an information civilization if we are to preserve freedom and democracy for another generation.”

Surveillance Is Getting Creepier by the Day

But the surveillance and data collection doesn’t end with what you do online. Big Data also wants access to your most intimate moments — what you do and how you behave in the privacy of your own home, for example, or in your car. Zuboff recounts how the Google Nest security system was found to have a hidden microphone built into it that isn’t featured in any of the schematics for the device.

“Voices are what everybody is after, just like faces,” Zuboff says. Voice data, and all the information delivered through your daily conversations, is tremendously valuable to Big Data, and add to their ever-expanding predictive modeling capabilities.

She also discusses how these kinds of data-collecting devices force consent from users by holding the functionality of the device “hostage” if you don’t want your data collected and shared.

For example, Google’s Nest thermostats will collect data about your usage and share it with third parties, that share it with third parties and so on ad infinitum — and Google takes no responsibility for what any of these third parties might do with your data.

You can decline this data collection and third party sharing, but if you do, Google will no longer support the functionality of the thermostat; it will no longer update your software and may affect the functionality of other linked devices such as smoke detectors.

Two scholars who analyzed the Google Nest thermostat contract concluded that a consumer who is even a little bit vigilant about how their consumption data is being used would have to review 1,000 privacy contracts before installing a single thermostat in their home.

Modern cars are also being equipped with multiple cameras that feed Big Data. As noted in the film, the average new car has 15 cameras, and if you have access to the data of a mere 1% of all cars, you have “knowledge of everything happening in the world.”

Of course, those cameras are sold to you as being integral to novel safety features, but you’re paying for this added safety with your privacy, and the privacy of everyone around you.

Pandemic Measures Are Rapidly Eroding Privacy

The current coronavirus pandemic is also using “safety” as a means to dismantle personal privacy. As reported by The New York Times, March 23, 2020:5

“In South Korea, government agencies are harnessing surveillance-camera footage, smartphone location data and credit card purchase records to help trace the recent movements of coronavirus patients and establish virus transmission chains.

In Lombardy, Italy, the authorities are analyzing location data transmitted by citizens’ mobile phones to determine how many people are obeying a government lockdown order and the typical distances they move every day. About 40 percent are moving around “too much,” an official recently said.

In Israel, the country’s internal security agency is poised to start using a cache of mobile phone location data — originally intended for counterterrorism operations — to try to pinpoint citizens who may have been exposed to the virus.

As countries around the world race to contain the pandemic, many are deploying digital surveillance tools as a means to exert social control, even turning security agency technologies on their own civilians …

Yet ratcheting up surveillance to combat the pandemic now could permanently open the doors to more invasive forms of snooping later. It is a lesson Americans learned after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, civil liberties experts say.

Nearly two decades later, law enforcement agencies have access to higher-powered surveillance systems, like fine-grained location tracking and facial recognition — technologies that may be repurposed to further political agendas …

‘We could so easily end up in a situation where we empower local, state or federal government to take measures in response to this pandemic that fundamentally change the scope of American civil rights,’ said Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a nonprofit organization in Manhattan.”

Humanity at a Cross-Roads

Zuboff also discusses her work on January 24, 2020, op-ed in The New York Times.6,7 “You are now remotely controlled. Surveillance capitalists control the science and the scientists, the secrets and the truth,” she writes, continuing:

“We thought that we search Google, but now we understand that Google searches us. We assumed that we use social media to connect, but we learned that connection is how social media uses us.

We barely questioned why our new TV or mattress had a privacy policy, but we’ve begun to understand that ‘privacy’ policies are actually surveillance policies … Privacy is not private, because the effectiveness of … surveillance and control systems depends upon the pieces of ourselves that we give up — or that are secretly stolen from us.

Our digital century was to have been democracy’s Golden Age. Instead, we enter its third decade marked by a stark new form of social inequality best understood as ‘epistemic inequality’ … extreme asymmetries of knowledge and the power that accrues to such knowledge, as the tech giants seize control of information and learning itself …

Surveillance capitalists exploit the widening inequity of knowledge for the sake of profits. They manipulate the economy, our society and even our lives with impunity, endangering not just individual privacy but democracy itself …

Still, the winds appear to have finally shifted. A fragile new awareness is dawning … Surveillance capitalists are fast because they seek neither genuine consent nor consensus. They rely on psychic numbing and messages of inevitability to conjure the helplessness, resignation and confusion that paralyze their prey.

Democracy is slow, and that’s a good thing. Its pace reflects the tens of millions of conversations that occur … gradually stirring the sleeping giant of democracy to action.

These conversations are occurring now, and there are many indications that lawmakers are ready to join and to lead. This third decade is likely to decide our fate. Will we make the digital future better, or will it make us worse?”8,9

Epistemic Inequality

Epistemic inequality refers to inequality in what you’re able to learn. “It is defined as unequal access to learning imposed by private commercial mechanisms of information capture, production, analysis, and sales. It is best exemplified in the fast-growing abyss between what we know and what is known about us,” Zuboff writes in her New York Times op-ed.10

Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft have spearheaded the surveillance market transformation, placing themselves at the top tier of the epistemic hierarchy. They know everything about you and you know nothing about them. You don’t even know what they know about you.

“They operated in the shadows to amass huge knowledge monopolies by taking without asking, a maneuver that every child recognizes as theft,” Zuboff writes.

“Surveillance capitalism begins by unilaterally staking a claim to private human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioral data. Our lives are rendered as data flows.”

These data flows are about you, but not for you. All of it is used against you — to separate you from your money, or to make you act in a way that is in some way profitable for a company or a political agenda. So, ask yourself, where is your freedom in all of this?

They’re Making You Dance to Their Tune

If a company can cause you to buy the stuff you don’t need by sticking an enticing, personalized ad for something they know will boost your confidence at the exact moment you’re feeling insecure or worthless (a tactic that has been tested and perfected11), are you really acting through free will?

If an artificial intelligence using predictive modeling senses you’re getting hungry (based on a variety of cues such as your location, facial expressions, and verbal expressions) and launches an ad from a local restaurant to you in the very moment you’re deciding to get something to eat, are you really making conscious, self-driven, value-based life choices? As noted by Zuboff in her article:12

“Unequal knowledge about us produces unequal power over us, and so epistemic inequality widens to include the distance between what we can do and what can be done to us. Data scientists describe this as the shift from monitoring to actuation, in which a critical mass of knowledge about a machine system enables the remote control of that system.

Now people have become targets for remote control, as surveillance capitalists discovered that the most predictive data come from intervening in behavior to tune, herd and modify action in the direction of commercial objectives.

This third imperative, ‘economies of action,’ has become an arena of intense experimentation. ‘We are learning how to write the music,’ one scientist said, ‘and then we let the music make them dance’ …

The fact is that in the absence of corporate transparency and democratic oversight, epistemic inequality rules. They know. They decide who knows. They decide who decides. The public’s intolerable knowledge disadvantage is deepened by surveillance capitalists’ perfection of mass communications as gaslighting …

On April 30, 2019 Mark Zuckerberg made a dramatic announcement at the company’s annual developer conference, declaring, ‘The future is private.’ A few weeks later, a Facebook litigator appeared before a federal district judge in California to thwart a user lawsuit over privacy invasion, arguing that the very act of using Facebook negates any reasonable expectation of privacy ‘as a matter of law.'”

We Need a Whole New Regulatory Framework

In the video, Zuboff points out that there are no laws in place to curtail this brand-new type of surveillance capitalism, and the only reason it has been able to flourish over the past 20 years is that there’s been an absence of laws against it, primarily because it has never previously existed.

That’s the problem with epistemic inequality. Google and Facebook were the only ones who knew what they were doing. The surveillance network grew in the shadows, unbeknownst to the public or lawmakers. Had we fought against it for two decades, then we might have had to resign ourselves to defeat, but as it stands, we’ve never even tried to regulate it.

This, Zuboff says, should give us all hope. We can turn this around and take back our privacy, but we need legislation that addresses the actual reality of the entire breadth and depth of the data collection system. It’s not enough to address just the data that we know that we’re giving when we go online. Zuboff writes:13

“These contests of the 21st century demand a framework of epistemic rights enshrined in law and subject to democratic governance. Such rights would interrupt data supply chains by safeguarding the boundaries of human experience before they come under assault from the forces of datafication.

The choice to turn any aspect of one’s life into data must belong to individuals by virtue of their rights in a democratic society. This means, for example, that companies cannot claim the right to your face, or use your face as free raw material for analysis, or own and sell any computational products that derive from your face …

Anything made by humans can be unmade by humans. Surveillance capitalism is young, barely 20 years in the making, but democracy is old, rooted in generations of hope and contest.

Surveillance capitalists are rich and powerful, but they are not invulnerable. They have an Achilles heel: fear. They fear lawmakers who do not fear them. They fear citizens who demand a new road forward as they insist on new answers to old questions: Who will know? Who will decide who knows? Who will decide who decides? Who will write the music, and who will dance?”

How to Protect Your Online Privacy

While there’s no doubt we need a whole new legislative framework to curtail surveillance capitalism, in the meantime, there are ways you can protect your privacy online and limit the “behavioral surplus data” collected about you.

Robert Epstein, the senior research psychologist for the American Institute of Behavioral Research and Technology, recommends taking the following steps to protect your privacy:14

Use a virtual private network (VPN) such as Nord, which is only about $3 per month and can be used on up to six devices. In my view, this is a must if you seek to preserve your privacy. Epstein explains:

“When you use your mobile phone, laptop or desktop in the usual way, your identity is very easy for Google and other companies to see. They can see it via your IP address, but more and more, there are much more sophisticated ways now that they know it’s you. One is called browser fingerprinting.

This is something that is so disturbing. Basically, the kind of browser you have and the way you use your browser is like a fingerprint. You use your browser in a unique way, and just by the way you type, these companies now can instantly identify you.

Brave has some protection against a browser fingerprinting, but you really need to be using a VPN. What a VPN does is it routes whatever you’re doing through some other computer somewhere else. It can be anywhere in the world, and there are hundreds of companies offering VPN services. The one I like the best right now is called Nord VPN.

You download the software, install it, just like you install any software. It’s incredibly easy to use. You do not have to be a techie to use Nord, and it shows you a map of the world and you basically just click on a country.

The VPN basically makes it appear as though your computer is not your computer. It basically creates a kind of fake identity for you, and that’s a good thing. Now, very often I will go through Nord’s computers in the United States. Sometimes you have to do that, or you can’t get certain things done. PayPal doesn’t like you to be in a foreign country for example.”

Nord, when used on your cellphone, will also mask your identity when using apps like Google Maps.

Do not use Gmail, as every email you write is permanently stored. It becomes part of your profile and is used to build digital models of you, which allows them to make predictions about your line of thinking and every want and desire.

Many other older email systems such as AOL and Yahoo are also being used as surveillance platforms in the same way as Gmail. ProtonMail.com, which uses end-to-end encryption, is a great alternative and the basic account is free.

Don’t use Google’s Chrome browser, as everything you do on there is surveilled, including keystrokes and every webpage you’ve ever visited. Brave is a great alternative that takes privacy seriously.

Brave is also faster than Chrome and suppresses ads. It’s based on Chromium, the same software infrastructure that Chrome is based on, so you can easily transfer your extensions, favorites, and bookmarks.

Don’t use Google as your search engine, or any extension of Google, such as Bing or Yahoo, both of which draw search results from Google. The same goes for the iPhone’s personal assistant Siri, which draws all of its answers from Google.

Alternative search engines suggested by Epstein include SwissCows and Qwant. He recommends avoiding StartPage, as it was recently bought by an aggressive online marketing company, which, like Google, depends on surveillance.

Don’t use an Android cellphone, for all the reasons discussed earlier. Epstein uses a BlackBerry, which is more secure than Android phones or the iPhone. BlackBerry’s upcoming model, the Key3, will be one of the most secure cellphones in the world, he says.
Don’t use Google Home devices in your house or apartment — These devices record everything that occurs in your home, both speech and sound such as brushing your teeth and boiling water, even when they appear to be inactive, and send that information back to Google. Android phones are also always listening and recording, as are Google’s home thermostat Nest, and Amazon’s Alexa.
Clear your cache and cookies — As Epstein explains in his article:15

“Companies and hackers of all sorts are constantly installing invasive computer code on your computers and mobile devices, mainly to keep an eye on you but sometimes for more nefarious purposes.

On a mobile device, you can clear out most of this garbage by going to the settings menu of your browser, selecting the ‘privacy and security’ option and then clicking on the icon that clears your cache and cookies.

With most laptop and desktop browsers, holding down three keys simultaneously — CTRL, SHIFT and DEL — takes you directly to the relevant menu; I use this technique multiple times a day without even thinking about it. You can also configure the Brave and Firefox browsers to erase your cache and cookies automatically every time you close your browser.”

Don’t use Fitbit, as it was recently purchased by Google and will provide them with all your physiological information and activity levels, in addition to everything else that Google already has on you.

Twitter CEO Says Employees Can Work From Home Forever If They Want

By John Vibes | Creative Commons | TheMindUnleashed.com

(TMU) – This week, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey told his employees that they will never be required to come back to the office if they don’t want to, and will now permanently have the option of working from home, even after the current pandemic is over.

Dorsey said that he wanted to decentralize the company’s workforce anyway, which has made this shift a bit easier for them.

A spokesperson for Twitter told reporters this week that the company has canceled all in-person events for the rest of the year, and said that they did not expect to see offices open in the next few months.

“We were uniquely positioned to respond quickly and allow folks to work from home given our emphasis on decentralization and supporting a distributed workforce capable of working from anywhere,” the spokesperson said, according to NBC.

“The past few months have proven we can make that work. So if our employees are in a role and situation that enables them to work from home and they want to continue to do so forever, we will make that happen. If not, our offices will be their warm and welcoming selves, with some additional precautions, when we feel it’s safe to return,” she added.

Other tech companies have also made a smooth transition into allowing their employees to work from home, but no one else has so enthusiastically embraced the new way of doing things as Twitter has.

Google has closed its offices through most of the rest of the year, but some employees will return to work this summer. Facebook will be following a similar plan, opening offices again this summer but allowing employees to stay home through the rest of the year.

Twitter employees, on the other hand, will be able to work from home forever as long as they get their jobs done.

“Opening offices will be our decision. When and if our employees come back, will be theirs,” the spokesperson said.

Twitter and CEO Jack Dorsey have made numerous unexpected moves in recent years, from the ban of all political advertising on Twitter to Jack Dorsey’s promise to pledge a significant portion of his entire wealth towards charity. Thus far, Twitter is one of the only major social media platforms to turn down advertising money from politicians. Despite years of controversy about inauthentic activity on Facebook influencing elections, the website still plans to allow political ads in this coming election season. Likewise, Google and YouTube will also still allow political ads on their platforms.

As The Mind Unleashed reported last month, Dorsey announced that he will be pledging $1 billion to help fund coronavirus economic relief efforts, and said that the remaining funds will be put divided amongst a variety of other charities. This donation is not only large in scale but is also a relatively large portion of Dorsey’s overall wealth—roughly 28% of his total 3.9 billion net worth. The money will come from his personal stake in Square Inc., the payment processing company that he also co-founded.

YouTube CEO Vows to Censor Anyone Speaking Against WHO

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com


  • Content that questions or contradicts the biased edicts of the World Health Organization is now being blocked, taken down or tagged as fake news on social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
  • April 26, 2020, Twitter suspended the account of the publicly traded biotech company AYTU BioScience for sharing information about its novel UV light therapy for COVID-19, which it is developing in collaboration with Cedars-Sinai medical center. YouTube also removed a video demonstrating how the technology works
  • NewsGuard recently classified mercola.com as fake news because we reported the SARS-CoV-2 virus as potentially having been leaked from the biosafety level 4 laboratory in Wuhan City, China, despite U.S. and U.K. government officials admitting they are considering this possibility
  • Facebook is also censoring posts that refer to SARS-CoV-2 possibly originating in a lab. The “fact check” basis for this censorship is an article written by a researcher who works with the Wuhan lab
  • YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki — wife of Google product director Dennis Troper — says the platform will ban videos that contradict World Health Organization guidance on the pandemic or share “fake or unproven coronavirus remedies”

Draconian censorship is in full swing again, this time around the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Just about anything that questions or contradicts the biased edicts of the World Health Organization is now being blocked, taken down, or tagged as fake news on social media platforms.

Twitter Suspends Biotech Company

For example, on April 26, 2020, Twitter suspended the account of the publicly traded biotech company AYTU BioScience.1 Its crime? Sharing information about its novel UV light therapy for COVID-19, which it is developing in collaboration with Cedars-Sinai medical center.

Expedited Food and Drug Administration approval is being sought for the technology, which involves administering “intermittent ultraviolet (UV-A) light inside a patient’s trachea.”2

Shortly before Twitter suspended the company’s account, YouTube also removed a video demonstrating how the technology works. Both YouTube and Twitter claim AYTU violated terms of service — which now apparently include sharing factual and truthful information that might jeopardize the surveillance capitalists’ agenda to control and vaccinate the entire world against SARS-CoV-2.

NewsGuard Is a True News Blocker

Similarly, NewsGuard recently classified mercola.com as fake news because we reported the SARS-CoV-2 virus as potentially having been leaked from the biosafety level 4 laboratory in Wuhan City, China, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak.

NewsGuard intern Nina Zweig (edited by deputy editor John Gregory) referred to my February 4, 2020, article, “Novel Coronavirus — The Latest Pandemic Scare,” in which I stated:

In January 2018, China’s first maximum security virology laboratory (biosecurity level 4) designed for the study of the world’s most dangerous pathogens opened its doors — in Wuhan.3,4 Is it pure coincidence that Wuhan City is now the epicenter of this novel coronavirus infection?

The year before, Tim Trevan, a Maryland biosafety consultant, expressed concern about viral threats potentially escaping the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory,5 which happens to be located just 20 miles from the Wuhan market identified as ground zero for the current NCIP outbreak.6

According to NewsGuard,7 “There is no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the source of the outbreak, and genomic evidence has found that the virus is ‘96% identical at the whole-genome level to a bat coronavirus.'”

Clearly, NewsGuard doesn’t understand or adhere to the definition of fake news, considering multiple government sources are reportedly looking into the virus’ origin, including Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom Fox News quotes saying:8

“It should be no surprise to you that we have taken a keen interest in that and we’ve had a lot of intelligence take a hard look at that. I would just say at this point, it’s inconclusive, although the weight of evidence seems to indicate natural, but we don’t know for certain.”

According to an April 5, 2020, article9 in Daily Mail, British government officials are also considering the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the Wuhan facility, stating the possibility of this “is no longer being discounted.”

Interestingly, April 16, 2020, report10 by CNN reveals the censorship of articles mentioning the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 may have leaked from the Wuhan BSL4 facility appears to come from China, which means NewsGuard, Facebook and others are functionally protecting Chinese interests and inhibiting scientific inquiry.

Facebook’s Fake Fact-Checking

Questioning the origins of SARS-CoV-2 will also land you in “Fakebook jail.” As reported in investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson’s news analysis, “Facebook’s Dangerously Fake ‘Fact-Checking'”:11

“I have often spoken of disingenuous ‘fact checking’ efforts conducted by conflicted third parties who are actually trying to shape public opinion and control the information the public can access …

A recent example is a popular documentary by Epoch Times about the possible link between Covid-19 and a research lab in Wuhan, China. The documentary formed no conclusions and the theories it discussed had not been disproven.

However, Facebook intervened to punish me and others who dared to share this factually accurate documentary on Facebook. Without warning, the social media company notified us that our pages were being throttled or shown to fewer people … Facebook also said that people visiting our pages would be told we share fake news.”

Would it surprise you in the least to learn that the “fact check” basis for this censorship is an article written by a researcher who works with the Wuhan lab? Me neither. Like NewsGuard, Facebook has placed itself as judge and jury over what lines of thinking people are allowed to engage in, and this tactic simply has no place in a free and democratic society. So, what does that tell you about these organizations and platforms?

YouTube CEO Vows to Ban Content Contradicting WHO

On April 23, 2020, article,12 Business Insider reported statements made by YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, wife of Google product director Dennis Troper. She too spits in the proverbial face of America’s freedom of speech:

“Wojcicki says the platform will ban content peddling fake or unproven coronavirus remedies. In an interview with CNN, she also suggested that video that ‘goes against’ WHO guidance on the pandemic will be blocked …

For example, she said, content that claimed vitamin C or turmeric would cure people of COVID-19 would be ‘a violation of our policy’ and removed accordingly. She continued: ‘Anything that goes against WHO recommendations would be a violation of our policy …'”

Among the censored YouTube videos is a viral video13 by Drs. Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, co-owners of Accelerated Urgent Care in Bakersfield, California, in which they questioned the logic behind California’s stay-at-home order. The video had garnered 5 million views by the time it was taken down. In the video, Erickson pointed out that there’s:

“… a 0.03 chance of dying from COVID in the state of California. Does that necessitate sheltering in place? Does that necessitate shutting down medical systems? Does that necessitate people being out of work?”

Erickson also criticized the fact that mortality statistics are being skewed by counting people who die from other conditions as COVID-19 deaths.

“When someone dies in this country right now, they’re not talking about the high blood pressure, the diabetes, the stroke. They’re saying ‘Did they die from COVID?’” Erickson said in the video.

“We’ve been to hundreds of autopsies. You don’t talk about one thing, you talk about comorbidities. ER doctors now [say] ‘It’s interesting when I’m writing about my death report, I’m being pressured to add COVID. Why is that?”

By banning anything that contradicts the World Health Organization’s recommendations, Wojcicki asserts that the WHO is infallible, which it clearly is not. There’s no shortage of examples proving WHO has been wrong on many occasions and should not be relied upon as the premier, let alone sole, source of information and medical instruction.

The WHO is beyond conflict, and because of its existing funding fails to complete its initial mandate to promote the attainment of “the highest possible level of health” by all peoples.

The WHO Has Long Been Criticized for Its Bias


For example, on June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic of novel influenza A (H1N1).14 A vaccine was rapidly unveiled, and within months, cases of disability and death from the H1N1 vaccine were reported in various parts of the world.

In the aftermath, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) questioned the WHO’s handling of the pandemic. In June 2010, PACE concluded “the handling of the pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), EU health agencies and national governments led to a ‘waste of large sums of public money and unjustified scares and fears about the health risks faced by the European public.'”15

Specifically, PACE concluded that the drug industry had influenced the organization’s decision-making.16 Another example is presented in the 2019 report17 “Corrupting Influence: Purdue & the WHO,” produced by U.S. Reps. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), which concluded Purdue Pharma had influenced WHO’s opioid guidelines.18,19

The WHO was also heavily criticized for its lack of leadership during 2013 through the 2015 Ebola outbreak in West Africa.20 Two separate reports published in 2015 highlighted the WHO’s failures, one issued by a panel of independent experts commissioned by WHO itself,21 and one by an independent group of 19 international experts convened by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and the Harvard Global Health Institute.22

The LSHTM and Harvard Global Health Institute experts pointed out that the WHO has lost so much trust that radical reforms will be required before it will be able to assume an authoritative role.

US Suspends Funding to the WHO Pending Investigation

Considering the fact that nothing has actually changed within the organization since then, it’s not inconceivable that the WHO’s COVID-19 pandemic response is questionable. The drug industry has no lesser influence over WHO today than it did in 2009, and the Gates Foundation’s influence has only grown since then too.

April 7, House Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Pa., and 20 additional co-sponsors introduced a resolution calling for the U.S. to defund the WHO “until its embattled Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus resigns and the United Nations-backed organization is investigated over its treatment of China during the coronavirus pandemic,” Fox News reported.23

Republican Sen. Rick Scott, Florida, is also calling for a congressional committee to investigate the WHO. According to Scott:24

“When it comes to coronavirus, the WHO failed. They need to be held accountable for their role in promoting misinformation and helping Communist China cover up a global pandemic. We know Communist China is lying about how many cases and deaths they have, what they knew and when they knew it — and the WHO never bothered to investigate further.”

A week later, President Trump announced the U.S. will temporarily suspend its funding to the WHO while the White House investigates the organizations handling of the pandemic.25

Gates Funds Not-So-Independent Defense

Remember Mark Lynas? Lynas is a Monsanto ambassador26 and well-established shill for the GMO industry27,28 who in recent years has started defending vaccines as well, suggesting that anti-GMO and anti-vaccine groups are closely linked. I wrote about this evolving trend in my 2018 article, “Strange Bedfellows: GMO and Vaccine Partnerships.”

On April 20, 2020, article29 for Cornell Alliance for Science, Lynas tries to debunk the “Top 10 current conspiracy theories” on COVID-19. The second conspiracy theory on his lists is “Bill Gates as the scapegoat.” How convenient, considering Cornell Alliance for Science is funded by the Gates Foundation.30

Third, on the list is the claim that “The virus escaped from a Chinese lab.” As discussed above, government officials in the U.S. and U.K. are not discounting this possibility, so why is Lynas? Could it be because the Gates Foundation funds the WHO, which in turn protects China?

Also on his list is the claim that “COVID death rates are inflated,” which he says “has no basis in fact.” Is that so? The CDC no longer requires doctors to do testing in order to confirm that a patient is in fact infected with SARS-CoV-2 or died from COVID-19. The numbers now include “suspected” and “assumed” cases. How could this not result in an overestimation of the problem?

Censorship Breeds Distrust

Censorship inevitably leads to public distrust. There’s no need for censorship when you have nothing to hide and are willing to address shortcomings. Ninety percent of news media is controlled by six corporations. As a result, the vast majority of what you read, see and hear is already part of a carefully orchestrated narrative created and controlled by special interest groups.

When you tack on censorship by internet platforms such as Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, your chances of being grossly underinformed or misinformed are exponentially magnified. The end result is a Truman-esque fictitious reality where most of what you believe to be true are in fact false.

With David Icke Banned From YouTube Freedom of Speech Is Dying Will You Step Up and Fight For Your Rights?


Video Source: London Real

Brian Rose of London Real announced that David Icke has been removed from both YouTube and Facebook within a 24 hour period.

Rose: ” if they really do have community policies that they enforce independently then why would they do that within 24 hours?” Could it be that Icke’s messages are too insightful in the way he points out corruption on a massive scale?

Brian May of Queen: Musical Jams for the COVID-19 Blues

By Robert O’Leary | YouTube


Editor’s Note: People who happen to like or love Rock music know the music of the band, Queen. I grew up with their “Queen Greatest Hits” album as one of my favorites. They wrote some of the best Rock and Pop songs, each with a special type of passion and love. Each member was a virtuoso and together their synergy still inspires. I thought it was really special to hear that Queen’s guitarist introduce the following jams of some of his band’s music, and even a special cover song. From there, he has inspired some great collaborations. They are comforting and exhilarating to hear while we are momentarily going through this shared quarantine experience. Enjoy!

Here’s another rendition with some famous players taking part:

Here’s a jam on one of Queen’s most famous songs:

Here is a take on one of Queen’s softer songs:

Here is another version, done by another talented young lady:

And lastly, here is a jam on one of The Beatles’ most famous tunes. Enjoy!

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

Bill Gates Being Destroyed on Twitter is the Most Uplifting Thing You’ll See Today

By Vic Bishop | Waking Times

Bill Gates is in his element these days, making appearances on all the mainstream channels, telling everyone about his plan to save the world from Coronavirus.

It involves working closely with pharmaceutical companies to invent and produce billions of doses of a CV-19 vaccine, then use the WHO and governments to restrict civil liberties around the globe until people take the vaccine. Oh, and then tracking everyone’s movement and vaccine status with cell phone surveillance, contact tracing, and digital immunity certificates.

Here he is talking about how mass gatherings will not be permitted until you’re all vaccinated:


While there might be a herd of people who are looking for a savior like Bill Gates, so-called ‘conspiracy theorists‘ have been warning the world for decades that Gates has long been positioning himself to be the provider of a pandemic vaccine that would be a safety requirement for all people to travel, drive, work, engage in commerce, worship, gather, or go to school.

But no one elected him to take charge of the situation.

He’s not a politician, not a doctor, not a virologist, nor an epidemiologist, not a scientist, and he’s not even a populist. In fact, he’s been on record for years talking about the need to reduce the global population through vaccine programs that discourage population growth.

What Gates is is a businessman, and while he has done a great public relations job of presenting himself as a philanthropist, business and philanthropy together create an uncomfortable conflict of interest.

So uncomfortable, in fact, you can see it on Melinda Gates’ face when in a recent CNN interview she stumbles on her words trying to avoid acknowledging that vaccines are a BUSINESS. When asked about the promise of one of 8 vaccines already in production, Melinda replies:

“I’d say it looks promising. We wouldn’t have put it into pre-clinical trials if it wasn’t, but, you know, to be honest, since we’ve been in this, this, er, business before of vaccines, you want to have many candidates…”

This is a free world, supposedly, so if you want a Gates’ sponsored vaccine, good for you, go for it. Go ask your doctor, and go spend your money on it.

Apparently, though, a LOT of people are NOT interested, and people from all over the world are absolutely destroying Gates on his Twitter account over this. To be honest, it’s one of the most comforting displays of solidarity and resistance I’ve seen in these darkening times.

On Gates’ own Twitter page, nearly every post of his is flooded with people calling him out for the damage his vaccine programs have caused, and declaring their right to refuse any vaccine about to be rolled out for this. The following post is an instant classic:

Some choice comments include this one created by people of the Democratic Republic of Congo who do not wish to be guinea pigs for Covid-19 vaccine trials in Africa:


And this one reminds us of the close ties between Gates and Anthony Fauci. Conflict of interest, you say?

Someone else posted a picture of Gates with known pedophile and sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein:

And there are memes:


A declaration of medical independence:

It just goes on and on, so if you’re looking for signs of hope right now, take a few minutes to see how people around the world are feeling about this.

And the following compilation of responses to Gates is quite hilarious. Enjoy!

About the Author

Vic Bishop is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com. He is an observer of people, animals, nature, and he loves to ponder the connection and relationship between them all. A believer in always striving to becoming self-sufficient and free from the matrix, please track him down on Facebook.

This article (Bill Gates Being Destroyed on Twitter is the Most Uplifting Thing You’ll See Today) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Vic Bishop and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio and internal links. 

The Complete Guide To Building a Successful YouTube Channel

Building a successful YouTube channel can be a heavy task sometimes. This is especially true if you are just a starter, with almost nil skills in YouTube marketing. The whole task of getting YouTube users to subscribe, like, and comment on your videos can be a mountainous task.

But as it has always been said, with dedication and determination, no mountain is too big. If you are willing and ready to build a successful YouTube channel, then you will. This post provides you with a clear and concise guide on how you can build a successful YouTube channel.

1. Identify your niche

The first thing that you will always have to do as you start building your channel is the identification of your own niche. Usually, your YouTube niche is that of your business brand, as you will have a tone of information to create YouTube videos.

Niche identification is a crucial step towards success on YouTube, as it will help you in lots of ways. Apart from knowing what to create YouTube for, and the information you need to create them, niche identification will also help you understand the mission of your channel, and thus know how to deliver the information.

2. Spend time on research

One big mistake that most YouTubers do is start posting YouTube videos without conducting any form of research on them. This becomes costly in the end, as you have to fight the competition, which you don’t even understand.

Proper research is critical if you are to be successful on YouTube. It helps you learn what your prospective competitors are doing. This will help you identify those gaps that, if you fill, then you can easily beat them.

By studying the top-performing channels, you will learn the things that make them get as many subscribers as they have, the keywords that they rank for, the kind of videos they post, and much more. Once you have learned all these, then you can find a way of implementing them on your channel.

3. Identify your target audience

Now that you have done your research and you now know the kind of niche that you want to create content n, and your possible competitors, the next is to identify the audience. Note that your YouTube channel is not a general channel where any form of content can be posted for almost everyone. YouTube users have different needs and problems. As a YouTube channel owner, you need to identify a particular problem and try to create videos that can help solve their problems.

Audience identification is a major step towards success on YouTube. It helps both you, the seller, and the users or consumers. Once you have narrowed down to a particular group of people, then you will be able to post content that addresses them in a way they find both interesting and educative.

4. The quality of the video is key

Once you have identified your niche, done your research, and identified your target audience, it is time to post your first video. And even though this might be your very first video, there is no excuse as to why it shouldn’t be of high quality. This first video will determine a lot, especially in getting subscribers for your channel.

A good video needs to both look good as well as be professional. This can be achieved by investing in quality video cameras.

5. Look for YouTube views

The whole purpose and reason for having a YouTube channel are to have people view your videos. Otherwise, why would anyone want to go through all the pain of creating a YouTube channel, creating videos, and posting them if they cannot be watched? As a YouTube marketer, it will bring you great pleasure to see that people appreciate your efforts by at least spending time to view your videos.

But research has shown that people are always reluctant to watch videos that have no other views. They tend to this the videos without views are not worth watching. This makes the whole idea of buying YouTube views worthy of the investment. You can get YouTube views at a low price from the seller such as https://socialboss.org/buy-youtube-views/ and kick-start your journey to get more and more views.

6. Post videos regularly

Your first video alone is not enough to bring you success on YouTube. Remember that YouTube success is measured using several parameters. These include likes, comments, views, and so on. To get all these, you need to keep your current subscribers happy and engaged. They should keep on visiting your channel to watch more videos.

Posting regularly is a secret that only top brands have mastered. They know that by posting from time to time, then you can get a lot of views, comments, and so on. It also helps YouTube algorithm know that your channel is an active one, and thus might rank it higher in YouTube search. While there is no set frequency of posting, making sure that you post at least twice a week is recommended.

And even though you want to post more frequently, make sure this doesn’t work against you. Most subscribers will end up unsubscribing if every time they get a notification of a new video. This is especially true when your videos are not high-quality and not educative enough. You should allow them time to think about the last video before adding them more.

7. Connect to other Social Media

A lot of online marketers recommend connect your social media accounts between each other. It is increase traffic. Start to connect to Instagram the most popular of them. Instagram can improve your business as well as YouTube.  By Instagram you can easy to double your views and subscribers if connect your channel link to bio of Instagram profile. Even more, ask in direct your followers to view your channel.

8. Engage your viewers

Social media engagements are key to success. You want people to watch your video and leave feedback. This can be either positive feedback or negative. Feedback on YouTube can be left either in comments or likes. Where people leave thumps down feedback, then you know you need to improve on some aspects. But if comments and likes are growing, then you need to keep up the good work.

The Senior Impact on Social Media

Social media is the epitome of, “It’s your party, and you can fill in the blank if you want to,” but there are still some unspoken rules about how you’re expected to navigate life in the digital age.

No matter how tempted you might be, constantly flaunting your relationship online is rarely OK, and you should avoid sharing too many selfies, pictures of your brunch, or overbearing parenting posts.

On the surface, Facebook might look like a young man’s game, but in reality, older users make up the fastest-growing demographic on the social media platform. Knowing that your parents and grandparents might be keeping tabs on what you post can certainly add another layer to social media engagement, but family connections aren’t the only things for which older Americans are using Facebook.

To get a closer look at their online activity, including political engagement, The Senior List analyzed data from Facebook Audience Insights focused on users aged 65 and older. Here’s a peek into their findings.

Older Facebook Users in America

When compared against the entire user population, the likelihood of finding younger Americans on Facebook is certainly greater than finding older users. Compared to 77% of the population between the ages of 18 and 64 with Facebook profiles, just 48% of Americans aged 65 and older could be found scrolling, liking, and sharing content on Facebook.

Still, a much higher percentage of older adults engaged with Facebook in some parts of the country. In Alaska (91%), Washington (60%), Utah (60%), and Georgia (60%), far more than half of residents aged 65 and older used Facebook.

In contrast, roughly 1 in 3 older adults in Connecticut (36%), West Virginia (34%), and Nevada (31%) could be found on the social media network, making these states home to the lowest population of older Facebook users nationwide.

Older Adults Get Political on Social Media

So, what are older Americans doing on Facebook? More than 2 in 5 (42%) were interested in politics, according to their user profiles, with political engagement highest in West Virginia (70%), Nevada (70%), and Mississippi (60%).

And while Washington had among the highest percentage of older Facebook users, just 14% were interested in engaging politically through social media.

Twenty-eight percent of Facebook users aged 65 and older leaned conservative in their political beliefs, while just 13% identified as liberal. Seniors from Southern states, including West Virginia (60%), Mississippi (53%), and Nebraska (50%), were the most likely to have conservative views, followed by Iowa and Arkansas (45% each).

Older Americans with a more liberal online sentiment were most commonly found in New York (25%), Connecticut, California, and Massachusetts (23% each).

Where Older Adults Get Their News

Compared to younger generations, older adults interact with the news differently and for different reasons. Facebook users aged 65 and older were more likely to interact with CNN (35%) and Fox News (18%) than younger users and were primarily interested in medicine (50%) and Social Security (13%).

Older adults were also 3 percentage points more likely than adults aged 64 and younger to be interested in the Second Amendment, but 2 percentage points less likely to be interested in national security.

The study also found that older Facebook users who identified as Democrats were just as interested in Joe Biden (35%) as older users who identified as Republicans were interested in Donald Trump (35%). Older Republicans on Facebook also showed interest in Ted Cruz (25%) and Mitch McConnell (23%).

The Social Senior Impact

Americans aged 65 and older may not make up the largest percentage of Facebook users, but their numbers are growing. The highest percentages of older users could be found in Alaska, Washington, Utah, and Georgia, although those weren’t the most politically active regions for older adults utilizing social media.

While many tend to lean conservative in their interests and values, Republicans and Democrats were equally as interested in Donald Trump as Joe Biden, respectively, so they might not be able to agree on everything – neither online nor during election season.

Why Are Followers So Important When You Are Looking To Be A Social Media Success?

Nowadays, with so many people taking to social media in the hope of bringing more attention their way, it is important to know how social media works in order for you to make the most of it. There is a continuing trend of more and more people signing up and creating accounts all across the different social networks out there. This has gone on for so long that more than three and a half billion people, just over half the world’s entire population, have at least one social media account.

A huge driving factor in this increase has been the countless success stories of people from all around the world who have joined social media with an idea and a passion and have gone on to make a name for themselves. While this is possible for anyone, it is also necessary to know what some of the driving factors behind it are. One of the key ones which cannot be overlooked is that of having enough followers to have your back. Read more about how you can easily get your hands on as many followers as you like. Before you do that though, take the time to read through this piece and understand just why you need followers for your profile.

What are followers?

 Followers refer to the other social media users whose attention is piqued by your social media account and decide to follow it in a hope to learn more and keep abreast of developments with your profile. By following your account, any updates you make will be relayed to them in their feed when they sign in. This means that it is easier for them to access your latest posts and to know what is going on in relation to your profile.

The number of followers a profile has is frequently pointed out as the most obvious measure of the popularity of that account in question and the influence or importance of respective social media users is commonly assessed by the number of followers they have. Having followers is not only an indication of the number of people who have taken an active interest in your profile and the topics it pursues but they can also contribute very effectively to helping your profile grow to be even bigger.

What do followers provide your profile with?

 In addition to providing your profile with an increased number of followers, followers on social media will frequently contribute to your account by means of interaction with your content. This comes in the form of views, likes and comments. This interaction occurs anyway but the benefit of having followers is that they are regularly reminded of updates to your profile and, therefore, they regularly engage with it. They can view your profile and its content at ease and like and comment on items they are interested in. Followers tend to engage more often with the content of the accounts they follow so simply by having more followers, you are immediately going to have more interaction.

How to get the most out of followers?

 Getting a large number of followers is crucial to making a lasting impact on social media but it is also necessary to get them interacting regularly with your profile. While attracting followers is a bonus, you cannot control how they interact with your profile. Some of them will be relatively active while there may be some who hardly ever use the social network in question or make very little use of it when they do. To this end, it is worth looking at other options in order to get the right kind of followers for your account. This refers to followers who will regularly engage with your profile, whether this is through viewing your content, liking your posts or commenting on your updates. The important thing is that they do so frequently. You can ask your followers nicely to do this or you can go for the more proactive approach that plenty of other social media users are doing.

Paying for followers

 The idea of paying for followers is one that has emerged in recent years and it is one approach used by social media users to have more control over the way that their followers interact with their profile. Paid for followers are sourced from genuine social media users so you know that these are users who are active on social media and understand the need for interaction and the best ways to go about generating more. If you choose to purchase social media followers, it is worth taking your time to add them as a sudden increase may be difficult to handle. For example, if you pay for ten followers, add one or two at a time and do this every month or so so as not to rapidly increase the number of followers. Any sudden increase is sure to look suspicious while it will also be difficult to manage from your point of view.

What Not To Do on Facebook


Ok here’s some news you haven’t heard before: Facebook is the epicenter of almost everyone’s lives today. At any given time 1.038 billion of us are using Facebook! Let’s face it, the majority of us won’t consider our day as officially underway unless we have logged onto Facebook and gone over our news feed with a magnifying glass.

There’s no denying it Facebook has a plethora of advantages for its users. It’s a way to connect with loved 💞ones, to share fun ✨memories , get interesting information like DIY pests control 🤓, have a laugh😅 , learn something 🤔new , get your daily news , catch up on gossip🤐 , stalk👀 your ex, stalk👁 a friend/ enemy you secretly admire 💙 but outwardly hate 💚and the list goes on…

But as with all things good. People tend abuse and overuse Facebook to the point that it becomes quiet frankly an annoying pain in the** to everyone on their friends list.

Disclaimer: – This article is meant to amuse? So if you are someone who is easily offended, instantly incensed, are looking for a reason to vent, or have no sense of humor. Move on. 🏃🏾

Otherwise keep on reading because you are about to find out just what not to do on Facebook.😉

1- Don’t be an Obnoxious Relationship Flaunter

I swear if I have to read yet another “#Best hubby ever! So blessed to have you in my life! Xoxo!” status update I will end up in jail on account of attempted manslaughter.

For the last time! No one wants to hear you’re sappy, over the top proclamations of undying love for your husband/boyfriend/ partner.

Instead of logging onto Facebook campaign optimization every time your heart starts overflowing with undeclared love. Do us all a favor, jolt your snoring love machine from his stupor, and enlighten him. I assure you, the 500+ people on your friends list will thank you for this small favor. 😒

2- Keep Your Food Fetish in the Kitchen where it Belongs

Unless you intend to send everyone one your list a food package this instant , or invite them all over for dinner, or you happen to be a food blogger . No one gives a shit about what you cooked today. So put down the camera and let us eat in peace you psycho.

imageStill not convinced you have a compulsive obsessive food disorder? Mental health experts have linked taking/ sharing too many pictures of food to mental illness. Time to check into the looney bin pal.

3– The Birthday, Anniversary , Childbirth Ranter

So it’s your spouse’s , boyfriend’s, children’s birthday, anniversary or their kindergarten graduation. That’s just fabulous, so unless your husband is a soldier deployed in Africa, or your first born is in boarding school in Alaska you can very well wish them in person.

And unless you intend to auction off that birthday cake and all of their/ your gifts, the used gift wrap and all the candles you own and lit just for taking those pictures.😖

imageThere is no need to broadcast them along with an over the top nauseating status update on Facebook , we really don’t care!

4- The Accidental Supermodel/ Selfie Queen👑

Ok here’s are the facts: You are no Kate moss or Gigi Hadid and the paparazzi won’t chase you if you paid them💰. So quit posting pics of yourself casually strolling along fully kitted up and act like someone just happened to snap a few hundred shots of you in monochrome no less and put them up as your profile pic .

Same goes for looking over the shoulder or staring out in the distance accidentally on purpose selfies . We are sick of them, spare us, stop fishing for likes and get a life . Or hire a photographer and get over your self obsession once and for all.

5- The Over Zealous Parent 

Yes we know your children are the center of your lives as they are for most parents . Let’s just keep it that way. No one but your family and closest, loyal and obligated friends will want to see and comment on endless pics of your little ones in their rompers, dresses, awake , asleep, on their own , being forced to pose next to stuffed toys, holiday props ,your sleeping husband … You get the idea.

6- The Compliment Inventor

So the supermarket, grocery store, gas station clerk couldn’t believe you hadn’t even graduated from first grade and you were the mother of two? Maybe you should stop shopping at stores that:

(A) don’t offer vision insurance to the staff- the guy has cataracts.

(B) don’t mind their staff coming in drunk to work or

(C) encourage the staff to lie through their teeth in order to get tips .

7- Thy Mother is thy Life

We have no doubt that your mother is your backbone, your rock , your entire world. We are also 100% sure she would love it if you were to tell her all this in person or over the phone instead of posting it on Facebook along with grainy , unrecognizable pics from your past .

Happy Mother’s Day indeed 🎉.

8– The Desperado

Yes, you know who you are. The attention craving poster of statuses that range from “I’m so alone” , “my life is over”, “I’m pissed”, “feeling so sick?” , ” the best day ever!” and “Las Vegas here I come!”.

The fact is. Your cunningly crafted, narcissistic, sympathy seeking, envy invoking attempt is not only glaringly transparent. It is profoundly annoying to the vast majority of people on your list who have zero interest but will nevertheless be subjected to the rants of a raving lunatic.

9– The Overly Devoted, Husband

Re read no-1 on the list then come back here. This guy won’t be able to digest his meal unless he brags about it first on Facebook. “My darling wife made me a smashing meal today!” followed by several pictures of the aforementioned meal probably taken under duress.

Thanks a lot dude! As if the half a dozen pictures your wife posted minutes before, to convince us that your home is an underground 5 Michelin star 🌟Zagat rated restaurant we would never have known . Now why don’t you go wash the dishes and belch out Justin Bieber’s “baby” to your Martha Stewart while you are at it.

10- The Rambling Ranter 🗣

This person has ranting down to science, politics, sports , religion , and social causes. Whatever the hot topic of the moment you can expect an endless stream of opinionated, obnoxious and awkward witticisms.

With an invitation to engage in a ferocious,often venomous discourse in an attempt to shove their righteous beliefs down everyone’s throats.

Hate to break it to you pal , but no one is going to experience an epiphany✨ just by reading one of your posts.

There you have it people the top 10 things not to do on Facebook. What are some of your Facebook peeves😡 Let me know!

A Close Up To Understand Social Media Agency In Detail

Social media is a widely used application that is not only helping you to communicate with people but it is also helping you to spread the business in the different parts of the world. On the other hand, social media today is a very powerful tool that can make you a star brand in a day or break you as well in the field of business. Reason- people connected with social media are a strong audience that is active and not passive like the older time.

It is covering the major customer base thus much of the business organization today prefers doing social media advertising and this is the main reason which has introduced the concept of social media agency in the market today. In this article all, you are going to know about social media agencies in detail. Let us begin by knowing this term in detail now.

Social media agency

When you want to promote your products, services, brand name online what is the first thing that comes into your mind. Most people will answer social media, isn’t it? Well if you are also one of them then you are thinking right because it really has that reach which can promote your things much efficiently than any other medium these days. Social media may include a lot of the application like Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn, etc. To make the optimum utilization of this medium for your social media advertising purpose you must know how to use them wisely.

If you don’t know about it much then here is the time you must hire an agency to perform this activity for you on your behalf. These agencies offer all relevant solution for your business which can help you enhance your business growth for a longer duration of time. Their services may include-

Social media publishing

They will basically take over all your social media handles in order to perform social media publishing-related activities in this. Agencies generally communicate with their clients and both of them will mutually decide how much will be posted which they are going to upload on the social media accounts each day- like on Instagram, Facebook, etc. Furthermore, they will then research about the customer history and current status in the market and then according to it, the agency will be going to publish the content.

Competitor’s analysis

The information about you and your company is just not enough they will also research about your Competitor highs, lows, growth, marketing strategies, etc. As this will also going to help them to decide and generate the designs and content for your advertisement which will be posted on social media for you. They can also showcase your position in front of your Competitor, their success, failures, etc.

In addition to this, there are many benefits which you must know about such agencies and social media marketing if you are interested to hire them-


  • It will raise the engagement of your buyers
  • Your time will be utilized more efficiently
  • It will help you promote your brand and let know people about your brand
  • Such agencies are much affordable and offer satisfying process range according to your budget
  • It is your profitable investment as the results are truly great
  • It also involves consistency as they will regularly publish and upload the message related to your brand’s advertisement
  • It is a good marketing strategy especially for the companies who are about to establish themselves in online as well as offline market
  • It will also streamline the process of your marketing
  • Further, it will save your money from getting wasted on the costlier digital marketing tools
  • It will help you generate more traffic in a very easy way
  • It will also help you in improving the brands’ loyalty
  • Different customers base from the different sources like Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, etc can be gathered for you by them
  • More targeted audiences can be attracted like for youngsters the right medium will be Instagram on the other hand for elderly people it will good if you promote the agency promotes the product in Facebook

Now since you know the benefits of such agencies, let us know how to choose the right agency and hire them for your social media marketing.

Tips to select the best social media agency for you- in detail

More than 95 percent of people today now agree that social media agencies are really advantageous for them. Thus, below in this article let us know about what you should look upon while searching for the social media agency for you.


Know about them and their contribution, for that you can look them on social media sites if they are present there. In this, you have to perform your own research about them and see their active participation. If they are not only active for their promotions how can be they helpful for you. Thus, it is very much important to look at these traits about any agency before finalizing them.

References and recommendations

See what their history is in this field and read the reviews about them on their online platforms. If it’s good then you are good to go but if it’s not then my dear friend you should certainly think about them twice before finalizing them.


It is good if you look upon their older projects first and then decide if their work is great or average. This is essential to see because it’s about your business after all. And you cannot take a risk in this important decision making. Tip: You can ask them to show their best works according to them and then you can judge them wisely.


Prepare the advertising budget according to you and specify them. If they are fine with the budget, their prices are satisfactory to you, then its fine. But, if not you can also negotiate with them if possible.

Bottom line

This was all the information about having the best social media agency for the promotion of goods and services of the business. Thus, get access to the best services providers for the promotion of the products.

This 4 Minute Video Will Really Make You Rethink Your Use of Social Media

Video Source: Max Stossel

“This Panda Is Dancing – Time Well Spent” – A poetic short film by Max Stossel & Sander van Dijk:

In the Attention Economy, technology and media are designed to maximize our screen-time. But what if they were designed to help us live by our values?www.timewellspent.io

What if news & media companies were creating content that enriched our lives, vs. catering to our most base instincts for clicks? What if social platforms were designed to help us create our ideal social lives, instead of to maximize the time-on-site and “likes”?

What if dating apps measured their success in how well they helped us find what we’re looking for instead of in # of swipes? As technology gets more and more engaging, and as AI and VR become more and more prevalent in our day-to-day lives we need to take a look at how we’re structuring our future.

Time Well Spent is a movement to align technology with our humanity: https://www.timewellspent.io/

Unprecedented ‘Architecture of Surveillance’ Created by Facebook and Google Poses Grave Human Rights Threat: Report

A new report from Amnesty International says Facebook and Google have a “surveillance-based business model.” (Photo: Flickr/GostGo/cc)

By Andrea Germanos | Common Dreams

A new report from Amnesty International accuses Facebook and Google of having a “surveillance-based business model” that threatens users’ right to privacy and other human rights.

The tech giants, said Kumi Naidoo, secretary-general of Amnesty International, have amassed “unparalleled power over the digital world by harvesting and monetizing the personal data of billions of people. Their insidious control of our digital lives undermines the very essence of privacy and is one of the defining human rights challenges of our era.”

Facebook and Google, according to the report, deserve to be singled out of the so-called Big 5 for their outsize influence on internet users.

With Facebook controlling not only its eponymous social media platform but also WhatsApp, Messenger, and Instagram, and Google parent company Alphabet in control of YouTube and the Android mobile operating system as well as the search engine, the companies “control the primary channels that people rely on to engage with the internet.”

In fact, the report continues, the two companies control “an architecture of surveillance that has no basis for comparison in human history.”

The use of the platforms isn’t really free, the report argues. Users are faced with “a Faustian bargain, whereby they are only able to enjoy their human rights online by submitting to a system predicated on human rights abuse.”

The companies hoover up user data—as well as metadata like email recipients—and “they are using that data to infer and create new information about us,” relying in part on artificial intelligence (AI).

The report says that “as a default, Google stores search history across all of an individual’s devices, information on every app and extension they use, and all of their YouTube history, while Facebook collects data about people even if they don’t have a Facebook account.”

Smartphones also offer the companies a “rich source of data,” but the reach of surveillance doesn’t stop there. From the report:

This includes the inside of people’s homes through the use of Home Assistants like Google’s Assistant and Facebook’s Portal, and smart home systems connecting multiple devices such as phones, TVs, and heating systems. Increasingly, data extraction is also stretching to public spaces through ‘smart city’ infrastructure designed to collect data throughout an urban area. Facebook is even developing technology that would enable tracking the inside of the human brain.

The trove of data and metadata—which represent a “honeypot” for potential government eyes—”potentially could be used to infer sensitive information about a person, such as their sexual identity, political views, personality traits, or sexual orientation using sophisticated algorithmic models.”

“These inferences can be derived regardless of the data provided by the user,” the report adds, “and they often control how individuals are viewed and evaluated by third parties: for example, in the past third parties have used such data to control who sees rental ads and to decide on eligibility for loans.”

Amnesty’s report says that “the very nature of targeting, using data to infer detailed characteristics about people, means that Google and Facebook are defining our identity to the outside world, often in a host of rights-impacting contexts. This intrudes into our private lives and directly contradicts our right to informational self-determination, to define our own identities within a sphere of privacy.”

The companies have a track record of privacy abuses. Among the examples noted in the report:

  • In 2018 journalists discovered that Google keeps location tracking on even when you have disabled it. Google subsequently revised the description of this function after the news story but has not disabled location tracking even after users turn off Location History. Google now faces legal action by Australia’s competition watchdog over the issue.
  • Facebook has acknowledged that it knew about the data abuses of political micro-targeting firm Cambridge Analytica months before the scandal broke.
  • Facebook has also acknowledged performing behavioral experiments on groups of people—nudging groups of voters to vote, for example, or lifting (or depressing) users’ moods by showing them different posts on their feed.

Facebook and Google, the report says, “have conditioned access to their services on ‘consenting’ to processing and sharing of their personal data for marketing and advertising, directly countering the right to decide when and how our personal data can be shared with others.”

The potential violations don’t end with privacy attacks because “a person may only give up some seemingly innocuous data such as what they ‘like’ on Facebook. But once aggregated, that data can be repurposed to deliver highly targeted advertising, political messages, and propaganda, or to grab people’s attention and keep them on the platform.”

Keeping users on the platform, the report says, means they see more ads and potentially click more ads, thereby creating more data in a cycle of corporate surveillance.

That, in turn, threatens people’s right to autonomy and the free development of ideas because these targeted ads “can influence, shape, and modify opinions and thoughts.”

From the report:

The starkest and most visible example of how Facebook and Google’s capabilities to target people at a granular level can be misused is in the context of political campaigning—the most high-profile case being the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The same mechanisms and tools of persuasion used for the purposes of advertising can be deployed to influence and manipulate people’s political opinions. The use of microtargeting for political messaging can also limit people’s freedom of expression by “creating a curated worldview inhospitable to pluralistic political discourse.”

Such abuses and potential abuses, says the report, make clear the era of tech self-regulation must come to end, with governments and companies alike taking steps to address the rights violations.

The report calls on governments to ensure companies are prevented from making access to their services conditional on user consenting to the collection, processing, or sharing of their personal data for marketing or advertising. They must also enact legislation to ensure the right not to be tracked and to “ensure companies are held legally accountable for human rights harms linked to such systems.”

Companies must switch to a model that respects rights and provide transparency about abuses they identify and remedies they will provide. They must also not lobby for weakened data protection and privacy legislation.

“Google and Facebook chipped away at our privacy over time,” Naidoo added in his statement. “We are now trapped. Either we must submit to this pervasive surveillance machinery—where our data is easily weaponized to manipulate and influence us—or forego the benefits of the digital world. This can never be a legitimate choice.”

“We must reclaim this essential public square,” he continued, “so we can participate without having our rights abused.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share it widely.

Read more great articles at Common Dreams.

Social Media Use Increases Depression and Loneliness, Study Finds

Source: Science Daily

Summary: Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram may not be great for personal well-being. The first experimental study examining the use of multiple platforms shows a causal link between time spent on these social media and increased depression and loneliness.

The link between the two has been talked about for years, but a causal connection had never been proven. For the first time, the University of Pennsylvania research based on experimental data connects Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram use to decreased well-being. Psychologist Melissa G. Hunt published her findings in the December Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology.

Few prior studies have attempted to show that social-media use harms users’ well-being, and those that have either put participants in unrealistic situations or were limited in scope, asking them to completely forego Facebook and relying on self-report data, for example, or conducting the work in a lab in as little time as an hour.

“We set out to do a much more comprehensive, rigorous study that was also more ecologically valid,” says Hunt, associate director of clinical training in Penn’s Psychology Department.

To that end, the research team, which included recent alumni Rachel Marx and Courtney Lipson and Penn senior Jordyn Young, designed their experiment to include the three platforms most popular with a cohort of undergraduates and then collected objective usage data automatically tracked by iPhones for active apps, not those running the background.

Each of 143 participants completed a survey to determine mood and well-being at the study’s start, plus shared shots of their iPhone battery screens to offer a week’s worth of baseline social-media data. Participants were then randomly assigned to a control group, which had users maintain their typical social-media behavior, or an experimental group that limited time on Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram to 10 minutes per platform per day.

For the next three weeks, participants shared iPhone battery screenshots to give the researchers weekly tallies for each individual. With those data in hand, Hunt then looked at seven outcome measures including fear of missing out, anxiety, depression, and loneliness.

“Here’s the bottom line,” she says. “Using less social media than you normally would lead to significant decreases in both depression and loneliness. These effects are particularly pronounced for folks who were more depressed when they came into the study.”

Hunt stresses that the findings do not suggest that 18- to 22-year-olds should stop using social media altogether. In fact, she built the study as she did to stay away from what she considers an unrealistic goal. The work does, however, speak to the idea that limiting screen time on these apps couldn’t hurt.

“It is a little ironic that reducing your use of social media actually makes you feel less lonely,” she says. But when she digs a little deeper, the findings make sense. “Some of the existing literature on social media suggests there’s an enormous amount of social comparison that happens. When you look at other people’s lives, particularly on Instagram, it’s easy to conclude that everyone else’s life is cooler or better than yours.”

Because this particular work only looked at Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat, it’s not clear whether it applies broadly to other social-media platforms. Hunt also hesitates to say that these findings would replicate for other age groups or in different settings. Those are questions she still hopes to answer, including in an upcoming study about the use of dating apps by college students.

Despite those caveats, and although the study didn’t determine the optimal time users should spend on these platforms or the best way to use them, Hunt says the findings do offer two related conclusions it couldn’t hurt any social-media user to follow.

For one, reduce opportunities for social comparison, she says. “When you’re not busy getting sucked into clickbait social media, you’re actually spending more time on things that are more likely to make you feel better about your life.”

Secondly, she adds, because these tools are here to stay, it’s incumbent on society to figure out how to use them in a way that limits damaging effects. “In general, I would say, put your phone down and be with the people in your life.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by the University of Pennsylvania. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:

Melissa G. Hunt, Rachel Marx, Courtney Lipson, Jordyn Young. No More FOMO: Limiting Social Media Decreases Loneliness and DepressionJournal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 2018; 751 DOI: 10.1521/jscp.2018.37.10.751

Melissa G. Hunt is the associate director of clinical training in the Department of Psychology in the School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rachel Marx and Courtney Lipson graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 2018.

Jordyn Young is a member of the University of Pennsylvania Class of 2019.

‘Whoa’: Twitter to End Paid Political Advertising on Platform, CEO Says

Twitter’s decision on Wednesday to ban political advertising was met with cautious praise. (Image: Jisc)

By Eoin Higgins | Common Dreams

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday announced that the social media site would no longer have paid political advertisements, a move sure to shake up the digital landscape that earned him praise from progressives.

“Wow,” tweeted activist Edward Snowden. “Big move by @jack, and a bigger contrast to @Facebook’s increasingly problematic policy positions.”

In a series of tweets, Dorsey laid out the reasons for the decision and made clear that the policy would only apply to paid advertisements.

“This isn’t about free expression,” said Dorsey. “This is about paying for reach.”


“They’re drawing a clear line between paid reach and earned, organic reach,” said NBC journalist Ben Collins.

Under the new rules, as indicated by Dorsey, a campaign presumably could post an advertisement video or photo to its own account—just not pay to promote it. The final policy will be announced on November 15 and implemented on November 22.

“A political message earns reach when people decide to follow an account or retweet,” Dorsey explained. “Paying for reach removes that decision, forcing highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. We believe this decision should not be compromised by money.”

Dorsey appeared to take a subtle shot at competitor Facebook, whose CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in a recent hearing that political advertisements on that platform did not need to be truthful. In response, activists bought an ad that shows members of the Republican Party supporting the congresswoman’s Green New Deal; Facebook approved the ad.

“It’s not credible for us to say: ‘We’re working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, but if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad…well…they can say whatever they want!'” said Dorsey.

Reaction from progressives was hesitantly positive.

“I don’t really know their reasons or [if] it is good or bad ultimately,” tweeted blogger Atrios, “but at least knock a dent in the ridiculous Facebook ‘free speech requires we privilege people who give us money’ argument.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share it widely.

Read more great articles at Common Dreams.